fixpafandomcom-20200216-history
Power in the PA House in 2007
Who will hold the power in Pa. House? : Wednesday, January 03, 2007 by James O'Toole, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette The Democratic majority's support for a Republican speaker was a startling answer to the question of who would wield the House gavel, but one that raised still more questions on how power would be exercised in the closely divided chamber over the next two years. Overshadowed by the blind-side blow to former Speaker John Perzel yesterday was the legislators' decision to defer action on the sometimes arcane but potentially crucial issue of a new package of House rules. That deliberation, to be rejoined in the next two months, is to produce the rules of the road that will determine both the way the Legislature does business and the extent to which the new speaker, Dennis O'Brien, can deliver the reform he promised in his brief maiden speech. "It's inside baseball, but it's vitally important inside baseball," said Tim Potts, an activist and former legislative staffer who has campaigned for a more open process in Harrisburg lawmaking. The office of speaker is enshrined in the state Constitution, but that document is relatively terse on the precise extent of its powers, noting that he or she will sign bills or resolutions passed by the General Assembly. The more substantial powers associated with the role -- such as selecting committee chairs, calling special elections, calling on members and ruling on points raised during House debate -- are delineated in the House rules, which, while built up over time and tradition, can be changed by a vote of a majority of members. The adoption of those evolving ground rules has rarely been a matter for intense public attention. The Legislature's outside and internal critics hope that will be different in a new session that follows nearly two years of controversy -- controversy that has now felled, in one way or another, a series of the caucus leaders who presided when a spectacularly unpopular legislative pay raise was enacted then repealed in 2005. The Senate's two senior Republicans were ousted in last May's primary. Rep. Mike Veon, the former No. 2 House Democrat, was upset in November. His ally, Rep. Bill DeWeese, in backing Mr. O'Brien, was forced to forgo his own ambitions to return to the speaker's chair, and Mr. Perzel, after seeing his party lose its majority in November, was finally outmaneuvered in his bid to cling to the gavel. Rep. Kathy Manderino, D-Philadelphia, an advocate of reform within the House Democratic caucus, said she was cautiously optimistic that yesterday's stunning developments -- though they themselves were the product of classic closed-door maneuvering by a handful of legislative insiders -- would, paradoxically, be a step toward a more transparent lawmaking process, one that would give more voice to rank-and-file members while loosening traditional control of a handful of caucus leaders. Mr. O'Brien promised just that as he acknowledged his unexpected elevation. "There are new rules that we are going to try to adopt to make this process move forward in a way that's credible for the people of Pennsylvania," he said. Rep. David Steil, of Bucks County, one of the handful of Republicans who voted for Mr. O'Brien, said he did so in the hope that it would pave the path toward the legislative perestroika sought by many members of both parties. "I took a chance because I wasn't convinced of the total support for some of the rules changes we wanted to make," Mr. Steil told The Associated Press. "I don't know that we can get to 102 votes without the support of leadership." Bruce Ledewitz, a Duquesne University law school professor who has written on the state Constitution, decried yesterday's process as an indictment of the Legislature rather than a step toward change. "This whole process illustrates perfectly that politics as usual and the back-room deal are alive in the Pennsylvania Legislature," he said. "The politicians in Harrisburg act as if the government were their private playpen ... it's all deals and personalities." Mr. Potts, the legislative critic, tempered his skepticism with hope. "There are two possible motives here. The Democrats finally figured out that if they're going to get anywhere, if they're going to stay in control in two years, they're going to have to establish some kind of track record. The other motive is that this is a pure vendetta against John Perzel," he said. "We'll find out which in the next two or three months." The election of a speaker from the minority party is unprecedented in Pennsylvania and rare in any legislative body. Tim Storey, an analyst for the legislative management program of the National Council of State Legislatures, said that the phenomenon of a bipartisan coalition electing a presiding officer was not unheard of, but that yesterday's events defied the usual pattern. "That's a unique fact pattern," he said. "Usually, it's the other way around. You'll see members of a minority party uniting with majority party dissidents to elect a member of the majority." One of Mr. O'Brien's first acts yesterday was to appoint a new House parliamentarian favored by Democratic leaders. Members also said that they expected majority Democrats to chair House committees, in contrast to the power-sharing arrangements reportedly proposed by Mr. Perzel as he bargained to hold onto the office. Ms. Manderino, daughter of the powerful former House Speaker James Manderino, said she hoped that Mr. O'Brien's election would be a vehicle for reform, but that she wouldn't be able to reach that conclusion until she sees how the House organization proceeds. "The rules ought to be shaped in a way that favors getting work done in a fair process that all the members get to vote on," she said. "They shouldn't favor the majority or the minority." * Politics Editor James O'Toole can be reached at jotoole@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1562. category:news coverage